Concern over children’s creche in residential zone

An open letter from local residents Neil & Les Brent regarding a proposed childrens creche off Lyme Road. How do you feel about a children’s creche in a residential area?

Open letter to all St Francis Bay Residents

A notice has appeared in the Kouga Express newspaper of the 3 August 2017 retheAPPLICATION FOR DEPARTURE FROM THE ZONING SCHEME TO OPERATE A CRECHE ON ERF 455 SEA VISTA ( 69 LYME ROAD NORTH)

As per Government regulations, this area is registered Single Residential Zone 1., Land Use Planning Ordinance provides for single-family houses. The regulations further state – Limited employment and additional opportunities are possible as primary or consent uses, provided that the impacts of such do not aversely effect the surrounding residential environment.

We, as the closest and most immediately impacted by the proposed crèche, for 35 children from 08.00 to 17.00, 5 days per week, object vehemently to the application. The outdoor play area directly abuts our property and according to the planned programme for the children, 4 hours per day are allowed for this activity.

Furthermore, our investment in St Francis will devalue. We moved here 28 years ago to enjoy a quiet environment – not to be uniquely impacted by the noise of 35 children playing 4m from our study and bedroom .

The applicant is not the homeowner (lives in Cape St Francis), is renting the property and not residing on the premises. I am disappointed and annoyed with the registered owner of erf 455, who has failed to recognise our concerns and rights, for the sake of income.

The applicant has ignored the change this will have on the character and essence of St Francis Bay. It will set a precedent in St Francis and open the door to “anything goes – free for all”.

The proposed crèche is situated in a particularly dangerous position. The applicant has not done a formal study to address the serious and dangerous traffic issues already existing. The reality of 35 additional cars driving this section of road at peak traffic times, is not conducive to dropping off and collecting children.

A further safety issue is that of wayward golf balls. Living on the perimeter of a golf course one accepts that this WILL happen. Any injury / death of a child will have major repercussions and be bad publicity for the golf course and St Francis Bay. This is a serious problem and it is surprising the golf club committee have given their consent without consulting with their members.

The applicant states in her application that “there is a dire need for infant and after care” in the area. It should be noted that there is already a crèche associated with St Francis College (situated near the municipal offices) and Talhado, with all the necessary requirements in place AND NEITHER OF THESE ARE NOT RUNNING AT FULL CAPACITY

The sound of children playing is usually a happy one so in principle the idea of a Creche next door is not always a problem. However in the case of this application my concern would be the position of the Creche. As identified by the Brents, it is a very bad corner for traffic to be dropping/collecting and likelihood of an accident would be high. Stray Golf balls are an unavoidable issue for the children’s safety and also I would question the security of the children when it is very easy to access any garden area from the golf course. As I understand it (please correct me if I am mistaken), the premises were previously used as a business and there is also a business running from the house next door so a precedent has already been set in that respect . So to summarize, The municipality and applicant must take particular consideration of the bad road position and blind corner and maybe look for a more suitable location.

Yes there was a business running here, but there are business and business. This was a low key affair and did not adversely affect anyone.

The one next door, falls under the municipal requirements of an occupational practice . i.e the owner must be in permeant residence and not more than 25% of the property may be used for business and according the law, may not disturb the neighborhood.

The applicant may operate an occupational practice if she lives on the premises and has a limit of 5 children.

Whilst the above commentator is fully entitled to personal, opinion based objections I feel that comments regarding traffic, the suitability of the current “creche” facilities and possible dangers of golf balls are ignorant and misplaced.

Where is your legitimate research (“formal study”) on traffic flow and congestion?

Where is your evidence regarding what the current institutions offer the village community? Are you sure that the institutions mentioned offer the same service as proposed?
Are the current institutions even registered, valid businesses? What qualifies you to make judgements on the services offered by the existing institutions as compared to those proposed by the new venture?

Where are the valid studies and reports that indicate the incidence of injury from projectile golf balls to residents sitting in their gardens? Has this EVER even happened?

What exactly is the “character and essence of St Francis Bay”?
It is a young, vibrant community with young children that need good quality care facilities – I’m sure that’s what was meant. So, yes, this will have a massive positive effect on that.

If one is going to make valid objection one must be properly objective and not dress personal prejudices up as public interest.

We have no personal prejudices except that we do not want 35 children , 6 m away from our home, from 08.00 to 17.00 hours, 5 days a week.

We have done a traffic count which amounts to one vehicle every 38 seconds passing the proposed creche property.

The creche opposite the municipal offices, associated with St Francis College is undersubscribed. They operate until 12 noon and I am led to believe that, if approached, can come to an agreement to operate the additional hours. They have ALL the necessary structures in place.

see reply to Caroline re golf balls

The essence of st Francis is surely not to change residential areas into fully fledged businesses. The “businesses” existing in Lyme Road all fall under the requirements of occupational practice, where the owner must be in residence and not more than 25% of the property may be used for business

The main objective for this child care facility is to provide a clean and safe, stimulating and social environment for our local children. As well as provide an establishment where holiday visitors can leave their children while parents get to explore activities in our area that a child might hinder. Being a tourist destination, our town lacks an indoor with outdoor child care facility.
CONSISTENCY WITH KOUGA MUNICIPALITY’ SPACIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAME WORK
Section 22 (1) of SPLUMA stipulates:
A Municipal Tribunal or any other authority to make a land development decision in terms of this Act or any other law relating to land development, may not make a decision which is inconsistent with a municipal spatial development framework.
With respect to ERF 455 Sea Vista, the Spatial Development Framework applicable to the St Francis Bay area, is not site specific and indicates the land to be used for residential purposes, the proposed crèche activity is regarded as compatible with residential neighbourhoods and residential land use. This is a social facility that falls within the category of churches, schools, crèches and activities normally associated with the functioning of a residential suburb.
The property is within the St Francis urban edge and in terms of Section 22 (2), the proposed land use should be regarded as site specific and supporting the development principles as per Chapter 2 of SPLUMA.

The aim of the facility is to care for children from 6 months to 5 years. The plan is to care full-time for 25 children(5 being babies)and have space for 10 daily visitors.
A daily routine program has been prepared to indicate how I plan to minimise the noise and scatter outdoor play- can be viewed at town planning. The property also has a high solid wall structure on the left hand side and on the right side is ample space between the play area and the neighbour’s house.
I worked at the first crèche in the early 90’s with Pippa Swart, which was a little rondaval next to the bottle store – 6312 has grown and a facility where babies and toddlers can be safely cared for and stimulated during business hours and part of school holidays is an absolute necessity to help our local parents who have to work. The locality of the property within an established residential environment, with businesses on most of those properties, makes it a prime location for a child care facility due to its accessibility off movement routes in St Francis bay. The proposed land use will contribute to a well- integrated urban area.
St Francis and the surrounding area is a growing community of young families and there is a dire need for infant care, after care and holiday care while local parents continue working in the area.

As the adjecent owner to the proposed Creche I fully object and will ensure I follow all legal routes to ensure this does not occur. I definately regardless of the time of year don’t want a crèche next door.

The St Francis Bay Golf Club has not consented to anything – it has just not objected. The fence around the property is of sufficient height to stop any wayward golf balls from being a danger. The property is in one of the least vulnerable areas on the golf course perimeter. To date no one, to my knowledge, has been killed by a wayward golf ball so the “WILL” is really a scare tactic. The committee is elected to act on behalf of the members of the golf club and acts in the best interests of the club and its members. If any member wishes to lodge an objection, he/she is welcome to do so in his/her private capacity.

The St Francis Golf course has signed the “neighbors consent form for the application for Departure from Provisions for the Zoning Scheme section 8 (LUPO) on erf 455 to operated a creche – Kouga Municipality Department of Planning and Development form B.

Yes this is the least vulnerable area on the perimeter- golfers should be chipping , not driving in this area.

We, on the adjoining property have tall trees shielding us from in coming golf balls, but we still have broken windows, balls on the roof and OVER the roof into the courtyard garden and carpark.

In terms of position it is a most dangerous corner and vehicles travel at high speed along Lyme Road North without any cogniscance of speed limits or indeed traffic calming speed-bumps
. I too would object to having screaming children on my doorstep

Firstly, it is very sad that people (in the words of Mrs Brent) “morally stop a family from earning an income”
How can one “shut down” a child caring facility that is going to benefit the town and the children before you even know the full program and plan of the facility?
The kids would literally be outdoors for a scattered maximum 3 hours of an 8 hour day AND would nap 2 to 3 hours of a day … (which I personally correlated to Mrs Brent’s lunch break)
As far as traffic is concerned… I most definitely would not put any persons, especially a child’s life in danger… on the premises I have made every bit of provision for how our flow of traffic would be (see my departure application at Humansdorp town planning) and most definitely considered the advantages of having the slow traffic circle as well as the speed bump in the 40km zone! I am pretty sure if a child/school sign was erected then drivers would take extra precautions? Don’t You, when driving in the INDUSTRIAL AREA for the new Sea Vista school? I am confident that TOWN PLANNING will make the necessary studies…
In EVERY SINGLE town/suburban area in the world!, there are at child caring facilities in residential zones.I am “affecting” 1 full time Neighbour and 1 holiday home owner…
I am sorry that I chose a position to BUY where their homes are on a road where most businesses are conducted from…(I am a little annoyed at the personal attack on the current land owner-who has only been the kindest and most considerate person I have EVER come into business with) I can not personally reside in the provided cottage as I am a family of 4 with 3 massive dogs, hence the DEPARTURE application and my following of RULES….
Our town does not cater for babies, does not do full day care, does not have an indoor/outdoor play center, does not do after care and does not have holiday club.
I have worked tirelessly this year, ON MY OWN, figuring this project out and FOLLOWING ALL LEGALITIES AND PROCEDURES.
Obviously I did never want to upset anyone… I just have a dream and want to see it transpire!
If anyone has an alternative, affordable property that would suite my proposed idea which is as perfect as ERF 455 Sea Vista then please advise…
FYI.. kids only SCREAM when they being beaten … kids in a safe happy environment laugh and communicate with each other … a sound that the world needs more of…
And this will be the last I say on this thread to justify my business as I find this whole situation very unethical.

Hear, hear Chantal (pun intended)
It’s a sad sign of our times that people are so averse to community “initiatives” that surely benefit future generations. The risk of golf balls harming children in this environment would presumably be the same risks they’d be exposed to living on “secure” residential golf estates. Imagine this was the only danger children were exposed to?
As for the perils of motor cars – how has the population survived in areas where children frequent shopping centers, beaches, doctors rooms, restaurants etc that are adjacent to roads where there could well be 38 vehicles passing every 1 second nevermind 1 vehicle every 38 seconds. Wow! Talk about living on the edge!
I do not have children, and I’m the first to cringe when a child is excessively loud and badly behaved, running amok in a shop or screaming on an aeroplane but I would think that in a supervised controlled, education facility with professional teachers the only sounds neighbours will hear is the sound of happy, stimulated children. I’m sorry to be blunt but anyone who is averse to that should not be interacting with humanity and should live in complete isolation. As a child-free, animal lover I’d far rather listen to the sounds of happy children than the sounds of golfers shouting down wayward balls, speeding vehicles or barking dogs even, nevermind lawnmowers, leaf blowers, security alarms, building works and other suburban noise pollutants….
But then again I’m not affected, I’m just opinionated.